Developer faces prison time for giving blockchain talk in North Korea
The prominent hacker and Ethereum developer Virgil Griffith was arrested by the US government Friday after he spoke at an April conference on blockchain technologies in North Korea. The US government considers his presentation to be a transfer of technology—and therefore a violation of US sanctions.
But Griffith's defenders, including Ethereum founder Vitalik Buterin, describe the arrest as a massive overreaction. Griffith worked for the Ethereum Foundation, and Buterin called him a friend.
"I don't think what Virgil did gave the DPRK [Democratic People's Republic of Korea] any kind of real help in doing anything bad," Buterin tweeted on Sunday. "He delivered a presentation based on publicly available info about open source software."
But federal prosecutors argue that Griffith, a US citizen residing in Singapore, knew full well that his trip violated US sanction laws. They say he sought approval for the trip from the US State Department, and his request was denied. Griffith made the trip anyway, traveling through China to evade US travel restrictions.
(Score: 2, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday December 04 2019, @05:17AM
It's either forgiveness *or* permission, not one, then the other when you don't get the right answer.
(Score: 3, Disagree) by exaeta on Wednesday December 04 2019, @05:44AM (14 children)
The Government is a Bird
(Score: 5, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday December 04 2019, @06:11AM (13 children)
Ethereum is a technology, Griffith spoke in front of NK devs, it follows that he transferred a technology. Formally he had no right to do that. From TFA:
His other actions, mentioned in TFA, indicate that he is anti-establishment. Perhaps he wanted to be arrested and then speak at the trial. He wouldn't be the first to find out that this strategy is not foolproof. To North Korea, however, he is just a disposable "useful idiot [wikipedia.org]," a starry-eyed idealist who is ready to sacrifice his life for, as it appears, the continued oppression of the NK people.
(Score: 4, Insightful) by pipedwho on Wednesday December 04 2019, @06:41AM (11 children)
I’m thinking the constitution overrides laws that attempt to run around it.
(Score: 2, Disagree) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday December 04 2019, @07:08AM (3 children)
No, it doesn't [wikipedia.org].
(Score: 2) by FatPhil on Wednesday December 04 2019, @12:21PM (2 children)
Great minds discuss ideas; average minds discuss events; small minds discuss people; the smallest discuss themselves
(Score: 2) by chromas on Wednesday December 04 2019, @09:21PM
I thought the first was about what comes out of the mouth, not what comes into it.
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday December 04 2019, @10:10PM
In terms of US jurisprudence there is probably not much to debate -- the conclusion was wrong. Schenck v. United States was basically reversed later by the US supreme court. Moreover, falsely shouting "fire" in a crowded theatre is almost certainly speech protected in the United States by the first amendment. Let's also not forget the context -- the statement was used in justification of upholding the arrest and conviction of draft protesters during the first world war.
Today the phrase is used usually in arguments of the form "some speech is not protected by the first amendment, therefore this other speech must also not be protected" and is basically always bullshit. Fortunately that is not how courts in the US determine whether or not speech is protected.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by sjames on Wednesday December 04 2019, @08:54AM (6 children)
It doesn't override itself. He gave aid and comfort to an enemy of the United States.
(Score: -1, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday December 04 2019, @10:28AM (3 children)
Incorrect. The United States has no enemies, and the only way it could have an enemy is if it were to formally declare war on another nation. This is frowned upon by the UN Charter, however, so the best Trump can to is have "frenemies", like Melania. Oh, and if exaeta suggests you sue anyone, run away very fast. The man is a legal imbecile. #exaeta'sCow, man!
(Score: 1, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday December 04 2019, @01:40PM (1 child)
I don't think there was ever a real peace treaty that formally put an end to the Korean War. So the Korean War is still really ongoing although there has been an uneasy ceasefire between North and South Korea since 1953. Since there is a mutual defense treaty between the United States and South Korea, that makes North Korea an enemy of the United States thanks to these treaty obligations, even if no formal declaration of war was made.
(Score: 1, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday December 04 2019, @05:01PM
There was no declaration of war by South Korea, either, since it did not exist! There was only a UN Security council resolution, only possible because the Soviet Union got pissed and walked out. They never did that again. But no, no state of war exists.
(Interesting case where the US Military wanted to charge a GI with treason, but for it to be treason, the US has to have an enemy, that is, in a declared war. The defense said it was not treason, since there was no declared war in Korea. The prosecution said, "Yeah, but this many people are dying every day!" Point being, combat and hostile relations are !war. )
(Score: 0, Offtopic) by khallow on Wednesday December 04 2019, @08:36PM
What law determines that? I don't see it in the US Constitution, for example.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by DannyB on Wednesday December 04 2019, @04:05PM (1 child)
If the president can do it, then anyone should be allowed to do it.
The server will be down for replacement of vacuum tubes, belts, worn parts and lubrication of gears and bearings.
(Score: 2) by sjames on Wednesday December 04 2019, @06:14PM
In a world where rule of law prevailed, they would be cellmates.
(Score: 0, Flamebait) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday December 04 2019, @07:01PM
fuck you and you stupid fucking government. we will route around all of the fucking parasitic scum.
(Score: 2) by Mojibake Tengu on Wednesday December 04 2019, @08:12AM (4 children)
Oppressing people to prevent oppression of people is not a prevention of oppression, it is oppression.
Rust programming language offends both my Intelligence and my Spirit.
(Score: 2, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday December 04 2019, @09:49AM (3 children)
When police oppresses an armed gang, and even their unarmed accomplices, it is to prevent the gang oppressing the regular people worse. At least in theory.
There are places where police is a worse thing than any gang, and this only further proves the rule. There is no distilled Good and no purified Bad; the real world only has degrees of damage, and numbers of people suffering it. You strive to minimize that, you "do good".
(Score: 2) by DannyB on Wednesday December 04 2019, @04:08PM (1 child)
In this case police are not "oppressing" the armed gang. They are protecting the public. Probably enforcing actual laws that are just laws.
That is a separate topic. In the above instance, it seems to be presumed that police were doing their job properly.
The server will be down for replacement of vacuum tubes, belts, worn parts and lubrication of gears and bearings.
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday December 04 2019, @09:35PM
In the physical reality, you still have armed guys forcing other guys do their bidding under threat of bodily harm.
The "protecting the public" part is the only thing deserving rational consideration, and even there some "protecting" may be doing more damage to more people than the supposed danger itself. This is the reality; it is flawed; and nice-sounding words get invented to hide it from unwary observer.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday December 05 2019, @07:09PM
So we should ban guns?
(Score: 2) by Bot on Wednesday December 04 2019, @09:20AM (1 child)
It's quite plain that ethereum and cryptocoins in general are the target of the drill.
If an overview talk of info accessible on the net is considered aiding the enemy, then any visit to NK is aid. Any click to a NK website is aid. The US itself by refusing a visa imply they have issued ones, which is aid.
The drill wants to sow FUD about cryptocoins, which, like with linux, will last until they manage to infiltrate the main organizations. Then cryptocoins will be almost mandatory and regulated to prevent new ones to rise.
Account abandoned.
(Score: 2, Funny) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday December 04 2019, @12:49PM
(Score: 5, Insightful) by GreatAuntAnesthesia on Wednesday December 04 2019, @12:17PM (2 children)
I mean, legality / morality of giving a tech talk in NK aside... why the fuck would you? No amount of money on earth would convince me to do what this doofus just did - surely it's obvious to any westerner that by willingly travelling to NK you open yourself up to a very real risk of either being abducted / tortured / killed by your hosts or arrested / put on a watchlist by your own gov. It's a lose/lose. Why would anybody expose themselves to that risk?
(Score: 2, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday December 04 2019, @02:31PM
Among the adventure travelers it is a popular destination. as each city of the world becomes more or less the same as any other city, this is a place that is different in every possible way, almost like going off the planet.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday December 05 2019, @07:15PM
Because hackers live outside the matrix.
(Score: 5, Insightful) by bradley13 on Wednesday December 04 2019, @01:09PM (3 children)
If he really thought this was not a problem, he should not have officially asked for permission. Afterwards, if the bureaucrats were upset, he could have asked for forgiveness. It would have been easy to argue that he was just presenting information that is freely available on the web.
He didn't do it that way. He obviously thought there might be a problem, so he requested permission. He was denied. At that point, going on to give the talk was stupid. He was directly violating a government directive. This puts him in a much more difficult position.
Everyone is somebody else's weirdo.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday December 04 2019, @02:03PM (2 children)
Definitely, the kid was dumb in a whole lot of directions.
But the FBI doesn't appear all that up to speed either.
The complaint contains a collection of facts strung together to seem evil, but doesn't say exactly how what the kid told NK would significantly help them.
The investigator should be interested in getting to a clear understanding of what happened, but he doesn't appear to have stopped to understand the technology.
If he understood what was out there, it would be interesting to see if a clear connection of the dots could be made as to how what the kid told the bad guys that was of value given an understanding of what is already out there.
This seems troubling that if Crypto currency is evil, then the FBI should be more knowledgable to protect against it.
(Score: 4, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday December 04 2019, @03:58PM (1 child)
The "kid" is 36 years old, wanted to renounce his citizenship yet got arrested visiting home for thanksgiving. This guy's actions weren't particularly rational, doesn't seem like he matured any since he left the nerd hive of Caltech.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday December 05 2019, @07:21PM
Perhabs and perhabs we are exaggerating the consequences he will face for his little disobedience..
(Score: 0, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday December 04 2019, @07:08PM (1 child)
you stupid fucking pigs didn't write the software and you don't own shit. fuck you and your dumb whore mothers.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday December 05 2019, @07:17PM
Even though this is clearly a troll, he has a point. Is Ethereum american tech? Can you help a north korean repair a car? What if he owns an american car?
(Score: 1, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday December 04 2019, @08:37PM
Available here: https://www.justice.gov/usao-sdny/press-release/file/1222646/download [justice.gov]
Looks like he had let government agents snoop through his phone "voluntarily" for a long time, apparently without legal counsel. Talk about providing the government the rope to hang himself with.
(Score: 2) by DutchUncle on Wednesday December 04 2019, @09:46PM (1 child)
Free speech is constrained by rules about safety (no yelling "Fire" in a crowded theater if it isn't real), security, confidentiality, agreements (yes there IS such a thing as a blackmail contract except it's not called that), etc.
When the Congressional "Sensitive Compartmented Information Facility" stunt happened, any engineer who ever worked on a secure project knew that they would have been fired, and lost their clearance, for much less of a breach. Yet somehow no punishment has been mentioned for the congresspeople.
Why are laws only for the little people?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday December 05 2019, @01:05AM
The Golden Rule: he who has the gold makes the rules.